SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1933 Supreme(Mad) 352

MADHAVAN NAIR
Tanneru Venkayamma – Appellant
Versus
Tanneru Gangayya – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Madhavan Nair, J.

1. The plaintiff is the appellant. The appeal arises out of a suit instituted by the plaintiff, the widowed daughter-in-law, against defendant 1, her father-in-law, and the other members of the family for a partition and separate possession of her husbands share of the properties specified in Schedules A, B, C and D of the plaint. Defendant 1 had married two wives By his first wife, defendant 6, he had two sons, Sri ramulu and Punnayya. Sriramulu died in 1911. His son is defendant 4. Punmayya died in 1923. His widow is the plaintiff. Defendant 5 is the brother of defendant 6 and brother-in-law of defendant 1. Defendants 2 and 3 are the children of defendant 1 by his second wife.

2. Schedule A of the plaint comprises properties gifted by defendant 5 under Ex. A to defendant 1, Punnayya, the deceased husband of the plaintiff, and defendant 4, the grandson of defendant 1; B schedule comprises properties that were subsequently acquired by defendant 1; 0 schedule comprises the ancestral properties of the family ; and D schedule consists of debts for which promissory notes and bonds were taken in the name of the plaintiffs deceased husband. The plaintiffs case as























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top